PDA

View Full Version : Why are we cheating Stanzi out of an opportunity?



#58ChiefsFan
11-25-2011, 02:20 PM
I'm not sold on Orton, I wouldn't mind being wrong but there is a thread about that already. I am confused as to why they made a decision on Palko after one NFL start and in effect completely passed on Stanzi. God knows if we judged Cassel like that we would have got a new quarterback three years ago.

Looking solely at college stats Ricky has numbers close to several guys that started as rookies and have had some success with a higher ceiling than our current veterans.

Stanzi 59.8% completion rate, 58 td 31 int @ Iowa

Newton 65.4% completion rate, 30 td 7 int @ FL & AUB not counting JUCO

Stafford 57.2% completion rate, 51 td 33 int @ Georgia

Freeman 59.1% completion rate, 44 td 34 int @ K State

I know hes the most popular guy on the team but I am looking for a long term solution to a postion that has been iffy on this team for some time now. I support Cassel no matter how bad he makes me look but he isn't getting any younger.

Jrudi
11-25-2011, 02:26 PM
Palko probably got the start beacuse of the familiarity with our offensive system. He's was here last year, and they probably thought (which I agree) that Palko gave us the best chance to beat the Pat's because we wouldn't have to limit the playbook.

They might just not think Stanzi is ready to this point. He might not even know the entire playbook, because when the regular season starts, backups RARELY get reps practicing our plays. They normally are running the scout team and focus on the other teams playbook.

I heard the other day that it wasn't until year 3 that Ben Rothlesburger was allowed to even see the entire playbook in Pittsburgh. It might have been more of a mental readiness than a physical.

okikcfan
11-25-2011, 02:49 PM
I'm not sold on Orton, I wouldn't mind being wrong but there is a thread about that already. I am confused as to why they made a decision on Palko after one NFL start and in effect completely passed on Stanzi. God knows if we judged Cassel like that we would have got a new quarterback three years ago.

Looking solely at college stats Ricky has numbers close to several guys that started as rookies and have had some success with a higher ceiling than our current veterans.

Stanzi 59.8% completion rate, 58 td 31 int @ Iowa

Newton 65.4% completion rate, 30 td 7 int @ FL & AUB not counting JUCO

Stafford 57.2% completion rate, 51 td 33 int @ Georgia

Freeman 59.1% completion rate, 44 td 34 int @ K State

I know hes the most popular guy on the team but I am looking for a long term solution to a postion that has been iffy on this team for some time now. I support Cassel no matter how bad he makes me look but he isn't getting any younger.


We need to win games plain and simple. Palko is more ready then Stanzi and Orton is better than Palko and has been there. We cant just quit, Orton is our best chance at this point.

#58ChiefsFan
11-25-2011, 02:52 PM
I fully support the decision to use Palko over Ricky for now, my issue stems from they had a chance to see what both of these guys can offer us and flushed it by bringing in Orton. We are not going to the playoffs without a Devine intervention so I don't believe that was the reasoning. We can not drop the pats and steelers games both and hope that the rest of the division sucks it up with us. If Palko can get the win why not let him keep going and let Stanzi actually be a backup? You can get any practice squad guy and throw them in as a scout qb.

texaschief
11-25-2011, 04:13 PM
I thought it was a good move to claim Orton. He is highly coveted. The Chiefs should hold him a couple weeks and wait to see if they can squeeze out a draft pick in a trade from Chicago. This scenario is the ONLY way that I see the claim of Orton as a good move.

If the the claim of Kyle Orton is legitimate and they want him as a competitor to start this season, it only tells me that the Chiefs are still believers in Matt Cassel, which is disappointing. A Kyle Orton claim means they don't want to know what they have in Stanzi before they head to the draft. The only reason they WOULDN'T want to know is because they still believe Matt Cassel is the answer at QB next season and beyond. If the Chiefs had any ideas of drafting a QB with a top 6 draft pick, they would be trying to figure if they NEEDED to make such a pick by playing Stanzi.

The Orton claim would make sense if Stanzi was the starter right now because Orton could compete with Cassel next season as the starter. Then, whoever the QBOTF is, whether it be Stanzi or a first round pick, would sit behind the starter for at least one more season.

If they plan on starting Orton this season in hopes of getting a couple more wins, then I think that's tragic. Never let a disaster go to waste. This is the perfect time to be evaluating what you have to set up your offseason in hopes of having a great 2012. With a few great free agent signings and a nice draft class along with all the returning injured players AND a last place schedule, 2012 is shaping up to be one of those seasons that could lead to a deep playoff run. But the franchise is just letting this opportunity go to waste and it really is disappointing.

azchiefsfan
11-25-2011, 06:22 PM
I think it is as simple as Pioli is on the hot seat, no matter what "NFL insiders" say. I think right now he wants the best chance to win to save his job and he'll worry about next season after this one's over. Stanzi had a terrible preseason, much worse than any of the other 1st round picks. Could he grow into a good QB? Maybe, but the odds aren't in his favor when you factor in the history of struggling rookie QB's. Pioli has to win and I think Stanzi is about #54 on his list of priorities right now.

chief31
11-25-2011, 08:36 PM
I think it is as simple as Pioli is on the hot seat, no matter what "NFL insiders" say. I think right now he wants the best chance to win to save his job and he'll worry about next season after this one's over. Stanzi had a terrible preseason, much worse than any of the other 1st round picks. Could he grow into a good QB? Maybe, but the odds aren't in his favor when you factor in the history of struggling rookie QB's. Pioli has to win and I think Stanzi is about #54 on his list of priorities right now.

Pioli's job on the hotseat? No chance.

Haley's? Almost no chance.

But Pioli's? No.

Losing your biggest contributing players for the season means that the season is a wash, especially for the GM.

I think you are way off base on this one.

2010chiefs
11-25-2011, 08:47 PM
I think you can't go wrong with having Orton, Cassel, Stanzi and Palko competing for the starting QB position. I'm sure the coaches know where all of these guys rank better then we do. Adding Orton tells me they know they need help at QB just we like we do! That's a good thing in IMO! Now Cassel needs to be out a legitimate QB like Orton!

#58ChiefsFan
11-25-2011, 09:48 PM
Thing is I don't see how Stanzi can have any chance of competing against those three. At this point on the surface it appears that they will end up releasing Ricky at some point in 2012 if they keep Orton. If Kyle ends up leaving they still screwed Stanzi.

Haley has a history of having 2 Qbs active with one running the scout team. As a Chiefs fan I have serious doubts whether or not this organization could ever develop a QB. The signing of Orton further proves this to me. If we are going to buy a QB I think we could have done better, though if Orton proves me wrong that crow will taste good.

Palko made some mistakes in NE but it was his first start. Is it truely throwing a season away if they stuck with the kid and give him more than one game before declaring him unfit to remain the starter?

azchiefsfan
11-25-2011, 10:37 PM
Pioli's job on the hotseat? No chance.

Haley's? Almost no chance.

But Pioli's? No.

Losing your biggest contributing players for the season means that the season is a wash, especially for the GM.

I think you are way off base on this one.

If Pioli and Haley's jobs aren't on the line, then I need to seriously rethink my loyalties-junior isn't ever going to win a Super Bowl. The Packers lost even more starters than us and won the Super Bowl. The injury excuse has been played to death. It isn't the injuries, it is a lack of drafting what we need most, like the O and D lines and linebackers. That is an oversight that has caused injuries and set us back more than the injuries themselves. That is poor management. I am not ready to throw them over board, but if there isn't ant impetus on them to get this team better than they are now, this franchise is hopeless.

#58ChiefsFan
11-25-2011, 11:20 PM
The Orton move is an attempt to make this team better but what is the true cost? According to Haley they are trying to add competition to each spot. That's fine but now in effect they have wasted a fifth round pick in Stanzi when we lack so much depth in many spots. I'd take any fifth round safety over Piscatelli as one position we could have used that pick. This season was in the crapper before Cassel went down now we have added what will be a fourth quarterback when there is less than a 10% chance Matt won't be under center next year.

Ryfo18
11-25-2011, 11:30 PM
If Pioli and Haley's jobs aren't on the line, then I need to seriously rethink my loyalties-junior isn't ever going to win a Super Bowl. The Packers lost even more starters than us and won the Super Bowl. The injury excuse has been played to death. It isn't the injuries, it is a lack of drafting what we need most, like the O and D lines and linebackers. That is an oversight that has caused injuries and set us back more than the injuries themselves. That is poor management. I am not ready to throw them over board, but if there isn't ant impetus on them to get this team better than they are now, this franchise is hopeless.

No, their jobs should not be on the line. You use the Packers as an example...Let's check out Ted Thompson's track record:

2005: 4-12
2006: 8-8
2007: 13-3 (lost in NFC Championship)
2008: 6-10
2009: 11-5 (lost in WC game)
2010: 10-6 (Won Super Bowl)

One bad season following a good one (look at 2008) does not automatically turn into "GET RID OF ANYONE AND EVERYONE IN THE FRONT OFFICE."

Seriously, changing the entire front office is a drastic measure. Players brought in from the Pioli regime will likely be replaced with the new regime's players (just like when we transitioned from CP to Pioli).

Simply said, Pioli is not on the hot seat. You don't just go canning GM's after 3 years, especially when they've brought along one playoff appearance.

TopekaRoy
11-25-2011, 11:32 PM
I'm not sold on Orton, I wouldn't mind being wrong but there is a thread about that already. I am confused as to why they made a decision on Palko after one NFL start and in effect completely passed on Stanzi. God knows if we judged Cassel like that we would have got a new quarterback three years ago.

Looking solely at college stats Ricky has numbers close to several guys that started as rookies and have had some success with a higher ceiling than our current veterans.
I don't think Stanzi is getting "cheated" out of anything. Palko started against the Pats because he was the 2nd string QB and knew the offense. Third string QBs don't work with the starting offense at all.

At that time the Chiefs had no way of knowing that Orton would ask for his release (in hopes of joining the Bears) and fall right into their laps. Had that not happened I'm sure Palko would have continued to start until Stanzi was ready and he would have started the last 2 or 3 games. The Chiefs have a responsibility to do whatever they reasonably can to get better and having Orton, Stanzi and Palko makes them better than just Stanzi and Palko.


Thing is I don't see how Stanzi can have any chance of competing against those three. At this point on the surface it appears that they will end up releasing Ricky at some point in 2012 if they keep Orton. If Kyle ends up leaving they still screwed Stanzi.


I don't see it that way at all. If the Chiefs keep Orton (and there is no guarantee they will) They could decide that Orton is a better QB than Cassel, for less money and cut Cassel. Even if they decide to keep both Orton and Cassel, which they have the cap space to do, I think they would release Palko and still keep and develop Stanzi. If anything, getting Orton makes it less likely that the Chiefs will draft a QB next year and more likely that Sranzi will stick around.

The worst case scenarios are that the Chiefs get a compensatory draft pick for Orton or if they decide to trade Stanzi, he should have some value on the open market because of his college career and he won't do anything in the last couple of games this year to scare off potentially interested teams.

Everybody wins! :D

#58ChiefsFan
11-25-2011, 11:46 PM
If it gets to a four way competition in training camp for the starting qb spot matt is the clear favorite, followed by Orton who is a veteran qb, Palko third because he has starting experience and Ricky who ran the scout team and was a back up for two weeks. There won't be a lot of change in the last two spots of that race.

In the end you have two veteran qbs who are not that much different, Palko who didn't get a fair chance to be a starter and a fifth round pick they never moved up to have a chance to learn more than be a scout. There is no long term solution in that.

TopekaRoy
11-25-2011, 11:58 PM
If it gets to a four way competition in training camp for the starting qb spot matt is the clear favorite, followed by Orton who is a veteran qb, Palko third because he has starting experience and Ricky who ran the scout team and was a back up for two weeks. There won't be a lot of change in the last two spots of that race.

In the end you have two veteran qbs who are not that much different, Palko who didn't get a fair chance to be a starter and a fifth round pick they never moved up to have a chance to learn more than be a scout. There is no long term solution in that.
I'm not so sure of that. Whoever starts Cassel or Orton, the other will be a better back-up than Palko. and you usually want your third string QB to be a young quarterback-of-the-future who you can develop into a starter. Palko has been shipped around from team to team and doesn't really have long term starting potential. Stanzi still has that potential. I think he stays.

matthewschiefs
11-26-2011, 12:02 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing Stanzi at all. I think the sooner we get him in there the sooner we can see if he progress at all when he gets time in games. Can't really tell that with him sitting on the bench. But I do want to see what Orton can do. I think that he's a tad underrated. I wouldn't mind seeing if he could give us a good year or two then we can turn to Stanzi. That's kinda the thing I am hopeing for.

#58ChiefsFan
11-26-2011, 12:14 AM
I'm open to either Matt or Kyle being the starter, I agree they would make a decent competition if Kyle stays for training camp.

I just wanted a better picture of what we have going forward after either of them are done here. We had a chance to evaluate our less experienced guys and passed on it for a pipe dream of making the playoffs. Now we won't know if we need to get an early round qb going forward. In the end that is a mistake to me and will cost us at least one year of developing the true qbotf. I still hold a hope Matt can turn the corner and do this better than he has for a few years more.

#58ChiefsFan
11-26-2011, 12:18 AM
I'm not so sure of that. Whoever starts Cassel or Orton, the other will be a better back-up than Palko. and you usually want your third string QB to be a young quarterback-of-the-future who you can develop into a starter. Palko has been shipped around from team to team and doesn't really have long term starting potential. Stanzi still has that potential. I think he stays.

I think they should have given Palko more than one chance before deciding his future potential as a starter. Let's be honest if they judged Matt the same way his butt would have been gone years ago. It looks like a double standard.

Chiefster
11-26-2011, 12:19 AM
Pretty sure Stanzi's getting paid, so not sure what he's getting cheated out of. I guarantee you this though: Orton has one game marked on his calender in week 17.

Ryfo18
11-26-2011, 12:27 AM
Pretty sure Stanzi's getting paid, so not sure what he's getting cheated out of. I guarantee you this though: Orton has one game marked on his calender in week 17.

I hope he has the week 13 game (@CHI) marked too. I'll be making the trip down for that game with some Bears friends and would love nothing more than a KC win.

Speaking of which, I just realized Kyle Orton probably used to play with Thomas Jones when he was a Chicago Bear. Random thought...

#58ChiefsFan
11-26-2011, 12:30 AM
Pretty sure Stanzi's getting paid, so not sure what he's getting cheated out of. I guarantee you this though: Orton has one game marked on his calender in week 17.

He isn't Haynesworth, I seriously doubt he is happy just collecting a check.

SIC J
11-26-2011, 12:31 AM
I hope he has the week 13 game (@CHI) marked too. I'll be making the trip down for that game with some Bears friends and would love nothing more than a KC win.

Speaking of which, I just realized Kyle Orton probably used to play with Thomas Jones when he was a Chicago Bear. Random thought...

Yes he did play with Jones.

JPPT1974
11-26-2011, 12:31 AM
Haley and Pioli need to be smarter than that. If they are having their jobs on the hot seat. Remember Pioli came from the Pats. And needs to do better with the Chiefs. It is also trying to make good management with the players and higher ups.

If they want to take it to the next and very, very high level!

TopekaRoy
11-26-2011, 12:53 AM
I think they should have given Palko more than one chance before deciding his future potential as a starter. Let's be honest if they judged Matt the same way his butt would have been gone years ago. It looks like a double standard.
I'm sure Pa;ko would have continued to start if Orton hadn't suddenly become available and Tyler will also start against the Steelers so the Chiefs haven't given up on him at all. But Orton obviously gives the Chiefs a better chance to win once he learns the offense. This was just an opportunity that the Chiefs had to jump at as long as they still have at least a mathematical chance of making the playoffs. You don't give up on the season when you have slim chance of winning the division. You give up on the season when you have no chance of winning the division.

texaschief
11-26-2011, 02:29 AM
If Pioli's job is in jeopardy, this franchise is in deeper trouble than I thought. If Clark is going to be changing GMs faster than Jerry Jones goes through head coaches, this franchise is doomed. No GM should lose their job unless they've been in that position for at least 10 years.

azchiefsfan
11-26-2011, 10:43 AM
No, their jobs should not be on the line. You use the Packers as an example...Let's check out Ted Thompson's track record:

2005: 4-12
2006: 8-8
2007: 13-3 (lost in NFC Championship)
2008: 6-10
2009: 11-5 (lost in WC game)
2010: 10-6 (Won Super Bowl)

One bad season following a good one (look at 2008) does not automatically turn into "GET RID OF ANYONE AND EVERYONE IN THE FRONT OFFICE."

Seriously, changing the entire front office is a drastic measure. Players brought in from the Pioli regime will likely be replaced with the new regime's players (just like when we transitioned from CP to Pioli).

Simply said, Pioli is not on the hot seat. You don't just go canning GM's after 3 years, especially when they've brought along one playoff appearance.

I'll over-look the fact that you either did not read my post or chose to go out on a tangent just for the heck of it and respond to what you actually wrote(unlike what you did). Year three is the put up or shut up year in the NFL. If we were 11-5, then 10-6, then 4-12(potentially), I could get into your logic. The fact is while Pioli has got some key skill players, the foundation of this team is bad-that is on the management. That is all I have said, other than, let me quote me since you seem to have ignored it, "I am not ready to throw them over board, but if there isn't any impetus on them to get this team better than they are now, this franchise is hopeless." Now let's see if your reading and comprehending skills improve this time around.

chief31
11-26-2011, 03:34 PM
If Pioli and Haley's jobs aren't on the line, then I need to seriously rethink my loyalties-junior isn't ever going to win a Super Bowl. The Packers lost even more starters than us and won the Super Bowl. The injury excuse has been played to death. It isn't the injuries, it is a lack of drafting what we need most, like the O and D lines and linebackers. That is an oversight that has caused injuries and set us back more than the injuries themselves. That is poor management. I am not ready to throw them over board, but if there isn't ant impetus on them to get this team better than they are now, this franchise is hopeless.

Again with the loss of less significant players that The Packers had?

Keep in mind that that is a Packers team that was already a Super Bowl contender, based on what they had done the previous year, whereas The Chiefs are widely perceived as having been better than expected, and fortunate to have had an easy schedule, and a weak division.

But, most important is that the 2010 Packers are not the norm for teams losing several starters to injury. They are the at the furthest possible end of the scale, as the extreme exception.


I wouldn't mind seeing Stanzi at all. I think the sooner we get him in there the sooner we can see if he progress at all when he gets time in games. Can't really tell that with him sitting on the bench. But I do want to see what Orton can do. I think that he's a tad underrated. I wouldn't mind seeing if he could give us a good year or two then we can turn to Stanzi. That's kinda the thing I am hopeing for.

I think, the sooner we get him into a game, or two, the sooner most of us will be ready to label him as a loser who needs to be replaced.

I hope he doesn't see any real playing time, to protect him from the masses of Chiefs fans.


I think they should have given Palko more than one chance before deciding his future potential as a starter. Let's be honest if they judged Matt the same way his butt would have been gone years ago. It looks like a double standard.

I agree. But he will be starting this week. So he does have a chance to keep Orton on the bench.


Year three is the put up or shut up year in the NFL. If we were 11-5, then 10-6, then 4-12(potentially), I could get into your logic. The fact is while Pioli has got some key skill players, the foundation of this team is bad-that is on the management. That is all I have said, other than, let me quote me since you seem to have ignored it, "I am not ready to throw them over board, but if there isn't any impetus on them to get this team better than they are now, this franchise is hopeless." Now let's see if your reading and comprehending skills improve this time around.

Year three is put up, or shut up.... I'll stick with the "extenuating circumstances" stance here.

While I agree that we have not done the right things to improve the "trench players", it is impossible to say if this was a good move, due to the lack of their team being on the field.

If not for the major player losses, this team may well have been a serious contender. There is no way to know.

It is possible that their plan to build the team, in a way that we may not agree with, (Less attention to the trenches) could have been a wild success. But the injury situation eliminated the evidence from being seen.

The player losses just cast way too much doubt on the situation for me to even entertain the thought of declaring a failure of the front office.

2012 is when we will see if their plan is a success, or not.

And, in the event of another season of player losses, similar to this year, they do not get a second "pass". They get an "F", as the repeated injuries would emphasize that their plan is a failure, due to the dependency on specific players.

It would fall under the catergory of "fool me once, shame on you......."

okikcfan
11-26-2011, 06:23 PM
I agree with many of you on many different points, yes I believe Pioli and Haley are both on the hot seat but not as bad as it may seem. Injured starters are our biggest problem right now I think, it effects the whole team over all. Oh, and money! Yes money, the blood of it all. We play the steelers. If you know Palko and Stanzi are going up against Big Ben and his Steelers, how many people would pay hard earned money to watch it? If you believe Orton could come in say after the half, how many people would come to watch that? The Chiefs may not be losing there fan base, but you can bet attendance is down, and you bring it back up by competeing and winning games and Pioli and Haley feel we have a much better chance at winning with Orton. But I could be wrong, it's just a thought.......

josh1971
11-26-2011, 08:23 PM
Hot seat= Your job in jeopardy.

Haley has one year left on his contract, and has had a let down season. Job not in jeopardy (yet)

Piloi- still putting this puzzle together- Job REALLY not in jeopardy.

Eventually, I want to see what Stanzi can do as well, but maybe once we have five O-linemen who won't just give us a good idea what he looks like on his back or with his face smashed into the turf.

wolfpack
11-27-2011, 12:03 PM
I want to see stanzi also. But he must not be that good or they would stop saying he`s not ready.
Orton is a 2.5 mil rental.

#58ChiefsFan
11-27-2011, 12:58 PM
I don't believe he couldn't be ready in a month though. My god look what Denver can do with a guy that can barely throw a football in the short term. We can't wait until all the stars are aligned before declaring him fit to try.

This is becoming my major dislike of this regime. They don't adapt their "system" to fit the players strengths. It is based on making our guys conform to this system that has not been wildly successful to this point.

Im originally thought the fourth year would be when I decided if this is a bust or not. Given we should have a much easier schedule next year I'm guessing we will end up with a 2010 season next year again. A playoff run of at least getting to the AFC championship would determine it a success in 2012 for me.

Chiefster
11-27-2011, 06:18 PM
He isn't Haynesworth, I seriously doubt he is happy just collecting a check.

True, but I wasn't referring to his happiness.

okikcfan
11-28-2011, 06:02 PM
My god look what Denver can do with a guy that can barely throw a football in the short term. We can't wait until all the stars are aligned before declaring him fit to try


The thing with Denver is they have done nothing but let Tebow do what Tebow does. He can't pass fer sh@t all he can do is run, and that wont last too much longer and Denver will be stuck with Brady Quinn

#58ChiefsFan
11-28-2011, 07:13 PM
I get what you're saying but I don't like the signing of Orton. This season was in the toilet once Cassel went down (probably before). Palko should have been given a month to show what he has. I wanted Stanzi to either suck or show he has the "it" factor before seasons end.

Cassel is going to be the guy next year, we need a backup and a practice squad guy. Evaluate Palko/Stanzi this year and if they can't get it done take your 4-12 early draft pick, get a qb and make him the backup starting at the first OTA.

That seems to me a better long term solution than getting another Matt Cassel with a better arm.

okikcfan
11-28-2011, 07:40 PM
I get what you're saying but I don't like the signing of Orton. This season was in the toilet once Cassel went down (probably before). Palko should have been given a month to show what he has. I wanted Stanzi to either suck or show he has the "it" factor before seasons end.

Cassel is going to be the guy next year, we need a backup and a practice squad guy. Evaluate Palko/Stanzi this year and if they can't get it done take your 4-12 early draft pick, get a qb and make him the backup starting at the first OTA.

That seems to me a better long term solution than getting another Matt Cassel with a better arm.


Well I have to disagree with that. If Orton does really well they could redo Cassels contract or let him go altogether. Palko has had his test and he failed! I'm sure there are a number of reasons why we have not seen Stanzi and at this point I'm sure we wont, at least not this season. We need to get this season over the best we can and beef up both our lines and get another pass rusher. I do not care to be " In the Toilet " and if Orton can get us out then I'm all for it.

#58ChiefsFan
11-28-2011, 09:05 PM
It just comes down to you have more faith in Orton than I do. I still wouldn't mind being wrong about him.

TopekaRoy
11-29-2011, 11:20 AM
It just comes down to you have more faith in Orton than I do. I still wouldn't mind being wrong about him.
I'm curious as to why you have so little faith in Kyle Orton. Is it because he was benched for Tim Tebow? We already know what he can do. In 2009 he completed 62.1% of his passes for 3802 yds with 21 TDs, 12 INTs and an 86.8 passer rating. In 2010 (in 13 games) he completed 58.8% of his passes for 3653 yds with 20 TDs, 9 INTs and an 87.5 passer rating.Those are solid numbers and he has 3 good receivers to throw to on the Chiefs. If you are worried that he won't play that as well as he did in Denver because of the O-line then that's something we can address in the off season.

If you want to draft a QB next year and hope he or Stanzi will be good then are taking a huge gamble. The league is loaded with 1st round QBs that were great in college and can't play at the NFL level. At least we already know that Orton can be a decent QB in the right situation.

OPLookn
11-29-2011, 11:30 AM
Just to let everyone know dumping Cassel isn't out of the question. He had a VERY front loaded contract and in the first 3 years he will have made 40.5 million of that 63 million dollar contract. That leaves 22.5 million or 7.5 million a year left over. Of that I believe a couple million a year are incentive based. I found this blurb interesting...

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/3237/matt-cassel

"It's going to be an ugly close to the season in Kansas City, and not because Cassel was a franchise-caliber passer. His backup, Tyler Palko, might be the least talented No. 2 quarterback in football. Cassel, 29, finishes with a 10:9 TD-to-INT ratio, his numbers across the board taking massive hits after losing ex-offensive coordinator Charlie Weis. Cassel struggles with accuracy, decision making, and pocket presence, and isn't the long-term answer in K.C. We're interested to see whether GM Scott Pioli agrees to pay Cassel's $5.25 million salary in 2012. It's certainly not an unmanageable cost for a starting quarterback, but Cassel isn't a good starting quarterback. At the very least, he will face competition for his job in 2012 training camp"

While dumping $5.25 million isn't easy we've dumped that much by getting rid of several players that added up to it. Getting rid of Cassel isn't entirely out of the question if Orton comes in an plays as good as or better than Cassel. However, I wouldn't be suprized to see us draft a QB in the first or second and have a competition between Stanzi and the new draft pick as to who will be Cassel's replacement and who will be the backup.

#58ChiefsFan
11-29-2011, 06:58 PM
I'm curious as to why you have so little faith in Kyle Orton. Is it because he was benched for Tim Tebow? We already know what he can do. In 2009 he completed 62.1% of his passes for 3802 yds with 21 TDs, 12 INTs and an 86.8 passer rating. In 2010 (in 13 games) he completed 58.8% of his passes for 3653 yds with 20 TDs, 9 INTs and an 87.5 passer rating.Those are solid numbers and he has 3 good receivers to throw to on the Chiefs. If you are worried that he won't play that as well as he did in Denver because of the O-line then that's something we can address in the off season.

If you want to draft a QB next year and hope he or Stanzi will be good then are taking a huge gamble. The league is loaded with 1st round QBs that were great in college and can't play at the NFL level. At least we already know that Orton can be a decent QB in the right situation.

IMO Orton is Matt Cassel version 2. Same height, weight and ceiling.

Ortons career rating is 79.4, Cassel 82.5. Matt has appeared in 2 more games but Kyle has had more opportunity to throw the ball, about 2000 yards more. They have the same INT% Matt has a little better TD% they both have just under a 60% completion rating.

If you look at their best years of 2010 there isn't much difference.

Matt Cassel for better or worse is this franchise, I think there is a less than 10% chance he isnt the starter in 2012. I don't see what Kyle can do for us that Matt can't. Beef up the line and give Matt more time and I think everything begins to click for our offense.

We are going to have a third or fourth place schedule next year. We will have a repeat of 2010 including winning the division. With the QB's coming out in the draft next year we should take one available in the first round, there is no reason why we would be drafting that early again in 2013.

The free agent QB pool next year is pathetic, beyond Orton, GBs backup is probably the best available and that isnt saying much.

We need a solution looking beyond when either Matt or Kyle retires. They will both be 30 next season and its time to take a gamble for a first round pick. RG3

I think Cassel is one of the toughest QBs in the NFL and his being placed on IR is about the same as loosing Berry on the second snap of the season. I am willing to take that risk to fast track a true first round pick as a back up QB.

If you could get Cassel or Orton being a backup to the other (As someone said it looks like Pioli would like to have it that way with Stanzi held back for developement) in theory could be alright.

I'm just saying you can get a first round QB for about 50 million less than when Bradford came out. Matt will make 7 mil less next year and he will only cost 5.2 million. We could rest the future on a first round pick rather than a fifith. I don't believe Stanzi is the next Tom Brady but if they would have played him we would have got an idea where we stand on that.

Ive said I wouldn't mind being wrong and I guess an ideal QB situation would be Cassel, Orton with RG3 in development. With the holes in our roster that's highly unlikely. I just fear we are going to screw ourselves in the future and be a contender for a short time.

chief31
11-29-2011, 07:09 PM
Beef up the line and give Matt more time and I think everything begins to click for our offense.

They will both be 30 next season and its time to take a gamble for a first round pick. RG3



Herein lies the problem....

If you want to "beef up the O-line" and are serious about it, then you need to draft an OT in the first.

Do you re-invest in the current plan, or do you take a pass on what you are building, to try and set thing up to make your next rebuild easier?

#58ChiefsFan
11-29-2011, 07:31 PM
If Pioli is the draft genius he is touted as he should get us both :smile

There are a lot of free agent OTs available in 2012, lets find someone with 3 good years left. Everyone agrees we should have done something about the line before now, I'd shore up what we have given we will have a softer schedule next year and a run game again. Get the QB with the high pick now and take the OT in 2013.

chief31
11-29-2011, 07:50 PM
If Pioli is the draft genius he is touted as he should get us both :smile

There are a lot of free agent OTs available in 2012, lets find someone with 3 good years left. Everyone agrees we should have done something about the line before now, I'd shore up what we have given we will have a softer schedule next year and a run game again. Get the QB with the high pick now and take the OT in 2013.

Get the OT now, and improve the LOT and ROT positions, which makes the jobs of your RBs, QBs, and WRs, easier.

Get a QB later, like after you have shown that you are capable of fostering a QB-friendly offense.

This team is far too weak to be making future picks, and expecting to win now.

#58ChiefsFan
11-29-2011, 08:02 PM
Get the OT now, and improve the LOT and ROT positions, which makes the jobs of your RBs, QBs, and WRs, easier.

Get a QB later, like after you have shown that you are capable of fostering a QB-friendly offense.

This team is far too weak to be making future picks, and expecting to win now.




I don't think this team is that far off. Our past two games if Cassel were in there would have been far different. We would have won the Steelers game, and we had a shot in NE much longer than I expected in spite of Palkos effort.

If they put the playbook in a Madden form my 9 year old could call a better game than Muir.

chief31
11-29-2011, 08:07 PM
I don't think this team is that far off. Our past two games if Cassel were in there would have been far different. We would have won the Steelers game, and we had a shot in NE much longer than I expected in spite of Palkos effort.

If they put the playbook in a Madden form my 9 year old could call a better game than Muir.

I agree about the play-calling, for sure.

I hope that a year of experience, and the return of Charles in 2012 will vastly improve the results.

I don't really like the idea of, yet another, OC next season.